The answer of SamuelSamuel B SmithB.
SmithSamuel B Smith of the Territory of MissouriMissouri and CountyCounty of St LouisofCounty of St LouisStCounty of St LouisLouisCounty of St Louis, the defendant to the bill of complainant of JamesJames FernonFernonJames Fernon and JohnConnelly

The defendant Samuel B. SmithSamuel B Smith
saving and reserving to himselfand at all times hereafter all manner of advantage and benefit of exceptions that may he had and taken to the many untruths uncertainties insufficienciesand imperfections in the
said complainants
bill of complaint contained for an answer topart of the complainants bill of complainant says that he
never made any arrangement
or agree-ment with said FernonFernon and Connelly that theywere to dismiss their action of in their
bill mentioned nor in any matter indused there so. to. do. neither did the said SmithSmith give them or either of them the said FernonFernon andConnelly any promise that if they would so do he would not
prosecute his writ of
enquiry of damages against them in that behalfnor that he would settle with them as theyallege, but he alleges and charges the fact to be that they commenced said actionofreplevin only with a
view of getting thepeltries and other
articles traded for
therein mentioned in
their profession and
there of their
own advice and fraud dis-missed their said action of Replevin without that there is no matter or things in

the said complainants bill of complaintnecessary for this
defendant to make answer to confess
confess avoid traverse
aAll which matters and
things this defendant is ready to maintain and prove as thishonourable Court shall
award and humblyprays to he hence
dismissed with his reasonable oath and charges most wrongfully sustained and that the
injunction of the saidFernonFernon and Connelly may be dismissed.Samuel
B SmithSamuel B Smith the above named
defend ant on his
oath says that the
matters of fact
stated in the foregoing answer are true